Re: ATTN: people who were getting CVSup crashes under -current

2002-10-11 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Thu, Oct 10, 2002 at 11:45:57 -0700, Archie Cobbs wrote: > I didn't get a signal-type crash, but instead just got this: > > Abort (core dumped) This IS signal-type crash, abort is signal 6. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://ache.pp.ru/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubs

Re: ATTN: people who were getting CVSup crashes under -current

2002-10-10 Thread Archie Cobbs
John Polstra writes: > I am trying to understand the CVSup crashes that were reported by some > -current users during the past week or two. I realize the crashes > had to do with changes in the ucontext structure, but I am trying to > understand why those changes mattered. My theory is that the

Re: ATTN: people who were getting CVSup crashes under -current

2002-10-10 Thread Giorgos Keramidas
On 2002-10-09 20:37, John Polstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am trying to understand the CVSup crashes that were reported by some > -current users during the past week or two. I realize the crashes > had to do with changes in the ucontext structure, but I am trying to > understand why those c

Re: ATTN: people who were getting CVSup crashes under -current

2002-10-09 Thread Andrey A. Chernov
On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 20:37:39 -0700, John Polstra wrote: > understand why those changes mattered. My theory is that the changes > would matter to the old pm3 port, but not to the newer ezm3 port. If > you experienced the crashes, please check which Modula-3 version you > have using pkg_info

ATTN: people who were getting CVSup crashes under -current

2002-10-09 Thread John Polstra
Folks, I am trying to understand the CVSup crashes that were reported by some -current users during the past week or two. I realize the crashes had to do with changes in the ucontext structure, but I am trying to understand why those changes mattered. My theory is that the changes would matter